![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/core-ultra-9-290k-plus-geekbench-entry.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
Comparing the results above to our own data, the 290K Plus now boasts a multi-core score that\u2019s a whopping 15% faster than the 285K. Single-core gains aren\u2019t bad either at 13%.<\/p>\n
Beneficial as the 900MHz boost to die-to-die communication and faster E-cores are in bolstering the 290K Plus relative to the 285K, I suspect there\u2019s more at play to create such a substantial jump in performance. More specifically, I believe we\u2019re looking at results using a Binary Optimisation profile, which boosts baseline multi-core scores by up to 4% in our testing.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s entirely possible that this 290K Plus is one of a few select engineering samples, rather than a rogue mass-produced processor out in the wild. Still, given that there\u2019s so much mounting evidence that points to the existence of the chip, I\u2019m all the more curious as to why Intel decided not to launch the SKU.<\/p>\n
Following the pricing pattern of other Arrow Lake CPUs, the 290K Plus could\u2019ve proven a tantalising proposition for performance enthusiasts, creatives in particular, at $399. However, I\u2019d need a wider range of results to know for sure, both productivity and gaming.<\/p>\n
I sadly doubt we\u2019ll see the 290K Plus hit the market, even if Intel has it reasons for concluding that\u2019s for the best. Thankfully, the firm\u2019s new Core Ultra 5 250K Plus<\/a> and Core Ultra 7 270K Plus<\/a> are both great additions to the CPU market. If the company can maintain this momentum with Nova Lake<\/a>, then the desktop processor space should finally have a spell of welcome competition that\u2019s been missing for too long.<\/p>\n